The Consequences of a War Against Men


We’ve all seen the memes, marches, protests, and videos. The theme is that men are terrible. The patriarchy must fall. Feminism is the solution. Who needs men? The future is female. Men must pay! Ban men. Men are simps. Women rule! Etc. There seems to be a war against men being waged. However, that may only be a cover for the bigger shadow war being waged against the West.

Unfortunately, such sentiments are rising and seemingly getting louder. However, one has to wonder where this is going. As a father of a remarkable young lady, I am all about the empowerment of women and the necessity of equality. However, I am also inclined to think about the world she will inherit. Perhaps it is time to ask ourselves two simple questions:

  1. What has this war against men given us so far?
  2. What will this war against men give us in the future?

Unfortunately, the answers to these questions demonstrate a much darker and larger agenda. It appears that nothing is as it seems. In fact, these answers might very well demonstrate one of the best examples of the Abilene paradox I have ever seen – in that we are all heading to a specific destination that none of us really want to go to.

What has this war against men given us so far?

The truth is that this war against men has resulted in a mixed bag. For example, today, there are more women than men in the workplace (Connley, 2020), more women than men in college (Leukhina & Smaldone, 2023), more women graduating college than men (Abdukadirov, 2024), more single women own homes than single men (Huskey, 2024), and more women are the breadwinners in their homes (Boudin, 2021). On the surface, it seems that women are winning their war, but my question is, at what cost? If accuracy matters, we must all admit that it’s not all positive. For example, women are experiencing depression and anxiety at increasingly higher levels (ADAA, 2024). Are these connected? What other potential negatives are we missing?

If outcomes matter, we should acknowledge that the consequences of this phenomenon are far-reaching, affecting various aspects of children’s lives and society as a whole. After all, the United States now holds the unfortunate distinction of having the highest rate of children in single-parent households globally, with over 18 million fatherless children (Kramer, 2019). Specifically, fathers are absent from approximately 80% of single-parent homes (AFPI, 2023). To feminists, that may not sound too bad initially, but let’s explore what that outcome looks like.

One striking impact is the economic disparity faced by fatherless families, who are almost five times more likely to live in poverty compared to their counterparts in married-couple families (Brewer, 2022; Robertson, 2022). That’s not good. Of course, the correlation between fatherlessness and adverse outcomes becomes evident in the increased likelihood of children from such households engaging in delinquent behavior and substance abuse (Thompson, 2018). Moreover, the absence of a father figure also takes a toll on psychosocial development, contributing to a higher probability of children dropping out of school and entering the juvenile justice system (Barrera, 2021).

The statistics surrounding violence and criminality are also quite telling. Father absence is a fairly strong predictor of violence for both males and females (Leving, 2009). Shockingly, 70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from single-parent homes (U.S. DOJ), and individuals from father-absent homes are 279% more likely to carry guns and deal drugs (Allen & Lo, 2012). This pattern extends to adolescents entering the justice system, with a significant proportion experiencing parental abandonment, substance abuse, or dysfunctional households.

The gravity of the issue is further underscored by the disproportionate representation of fatherless children in the prison system. Reports vary but indicate that children who grow up in fatherless homes are more likely to offend and go to jail as adults than those raised in dual-parent households (Kruk, 2012). Of course, this includes a significant percentage of both adolescent murderers and long-term prison inmates originating from fatherless homes.

The implications extend well beyond individual behavior. The lack of parental supervision at home is identified by 71% of teachers and 90% of law enforcement officials as a major factor contributing to violence in schools (AFPI, 2023). Even in cases of school shootings, a staggering 82% of perpetrators grew up in unstable family environments or without both biological parents together (Langman, 2016).

We can simplify it to this: as the percentage of fatherless children increases, so do the crime rates. Is this really a victory for our children or our society? The measurement of effectiveness resides almost solely in how close one gets to the goal. So we have to ask ourselves, what is the goal? If a complete breakdown of our society is the goal, congratulations are in order because we are getting closer to that each passing day. However, if the goal is to raise functional adults in a thriving society, I would argue that we are losing that battle.

Frankly, none of this should come as a shock. However, the data underscores the urgency of understanding and mitigating the long-term consequences of the father’s absence for the well-being of the children and the broader community. The fact of the matter is that fathers play a unique and vital role in their children’s social, emotional, and cognitive development and, by extension, society in general. However, the result of the overt promotion and advocacy of having a father be absent is becoming painfully obvious.

Our nation is in decline, but this problem has only just begun. And really, I don’t think most feminists truly understand what they are asking for, let alone truly understand what they are engaging in or who is pulling the strings. We need to consider the cause and effect of what this all means because the data presented thus far is merely a snapshot of where we are currently at. Has our society lied to our women? If so, the question is, ‘Why?’ Of course, if we are wise, we also need to think about where we go from here if nothing changes. In other words, we should be careful what we wish for and appeal to accuracy.

What will this war against men give us in the future?

While predicting the future is impossible, we can discern probable cause-and-effect relationships and make informed speculations. First, we must acknowledge our society’s tolerance and, occasionally, its promotion of the erosion of traditional family values. However, popular narratives often carry risks because of their widespread acceptance rather than their wisdom. As Socrates famously noted, “If you want to be wrong, follow the masses.” This notion rings especially true in what can be seen as an ongoing societal bias against men, the consequences of which are already evident, though the full impact remains to be seen. Make no mistake, more repercussions are on the horizon.

It is evident that diminishing family values contribute to social fragmentation. This breakdown impacts not only the familial unit but also the wider community bonds. Yet, the prevailing anti-male narrative shows no signs of receding, and we should prepare for potential exacerbations before any improvement. This social unraveling is likely to intensify existing social challenges, including crime rates, substance abuse, and mental health issues, not to mention the financial burdens these issues will undoubtedly impose. Conversely, we must understand that robust family structures often serve as societal stabilizers. So, let’s ask ourselves which scenario we prefer and whether our current trajectory is correct.

Expanding the lens, the implications of deteriorating educational standards become alarming. We now find ourselves in a scenario where, according to the Department of Education in 2005, a significant number of high school graduates are unprepared for even entry-level jobs or remedial college courses. This rising level of ignorance is concerning, as those less informed are more susceptible to manipulation. Additionally, research by Dworak et al. (2023) suggests a decline in IQ levels, and data from Thompson (2023) indicates a significant drop in educational engagement among young men. Concurrently, the influence of feminism is growing, with over 61% of women identifying as feminists, according to Barroso (2020). Is there a correlation between the rise of feminism and the intensification of these issues? Let’s delve into these results and explore the potential linkages.

A Seemingly Logical Projection

Again, children from disrupted family environments often face significant educational challenges, which contribute to broader societal ignorance. A nation grappling with widespread ignorance will likely encounter many problems affecting its economic, social, and political spheres. Among these issues are reduced productivity, stifled innovation, entrenched inequalities, and limited social mobility, collectively fostering societal instability.

Societal instability and economic instability are deeply interconnected. Family and educational breakdowns lead to economic challenges as individuals struggle to maintain stable employment and financial security. Unsurprisingly, children raised in unstable environments tend to replicate these patterns, perpetuating a cycle of instability and economic decline. This cycle often results in increased crime rates.

As family values erode and economic conditions worsen, society’s fabric weakens, leading to cultural shifts prioritizing individualism over collective well-being. Look around! We are witnessing the century of “me,” which overlooks the importance of family structures entirely. The trend of high divorce rates (Bieber, 2024) and the decline in marriages (Cox, 2024), influenced by women’s increasing reluctance to marry, reflects these shifts. Let me be clear. While some might argue that there has been a decrease in divorce rates, the reality is that fewer people are choosing to marry at all, which will profoundly impact our collective future (Cox, 2024).

For example, the societal shift away from family values leads to declining population growth, which impacts workforce dynamics, aging populations, national debt, and overall national strength. This weakening of a nation makes it susceptible to collapse or external defeat. Moreover, prevalent misconceptions about masculinity and ‘warrior energy’ being toxic further undermine important elements such as our military’s effectiveness.

From another angle, the influence of feminist motivations on career goals, social media, perceptions of family structure, and a judicial system biased against men are driving predictable and troubling outcomes. This leads to a scenario where men, feeling marginalized and vilified, withdraw from societal roles, exacerbating the decline in relationships, marriage, and childbirth.

The systemic disincentives for men regarding economic and legal challenges in familial contexts are significant. The current system, perceived as punitive towards men, diminishes their willingness to engage in family life, fearing the loss of their children and assets in the event of separation. This systemic issue merely sets a precedent for further societal fragmentation along the lines of gender, ethnicity, and other demographics. Such fragmentation often leads to violence and a breakdown in the rule of law, further eroding social cohesion and stability.

Economically, this societal instability manifests in various forms, including riots and organized retail crime, which profoundly affect businesses and contribute to economic decline. The resulting environment of insecurity discourages employment and business investment, perpetuating economic stagnation and adversity. As societal fragmentation worsens, political corruption and partisan politics intensify, eroding public trust in the system and stifling economic growth and innovation. This corruption and loss of trust often lead to the erosion of civil liberties and an increase in authoritarian practices as those in power seek to suppress dissent and consolidate control.

Indeed, this all paints a grim picture of a society spiraling into autocratic rule, where individual rights are suppressed and the foundational principles of the Republic are undermined. The question then arises, “Who gains?” While it may seem that no one benefits in such a scenario, the reality is that certain powers benefit significantly from the unrest and the consequent consolidation of authority. Moreover, there is a good chance that this was their plan from the beginning.

Things To Ponder

The erosion of our social fabric is increasingly evident, and several factors contributing to this decline are identifiable. In many respects, the dystopian future we feared is unfolding before our eyes. While some may view these observations as alarmist, the warning signs are unmistakable, and our current trajectory appears to confirm our worst fears. Without timely intervention, the situation is poised to worsen significantly.

Can we accept such a future? Would we want to? The troubling reality is that these developments are largely self-inflicted. That is the good news because it also means that we can self-correct. However, in order to do that, it is essential to consider the origins of the ideologies and policies that have led us to this point.

Before delving into the motives behind these societal changes, let’s consider potential solutions. To begin with, addressing the pervasive anti-male narratives is crucial. An honest examination of the effects of the rise of feminism and other social changes leads to sobering insights about our societal path. If this analysis holds, one apparent solution emerges a reclamation of traditional gender roles, a renewed commitment to reason, and a restructuring of legal frameworks to remove disincentives for fatherhood. Men, in particular, need to embrace their authentic selves and challenge the prevailing narratives that undermine both personal and national values.

Our society’s stability heavily depends on the presence of fathers. Both men and women must recognize and commit to the importance of fatherhood. I advise being wary of relationships with individuals who oppose this view; such disagreements can create significant personal and societal conflict. Furthermore, it’s advisable to steer clear of those who are predominantly self-focused, as their priorities may not align with familial or societal well-being. Before entering any significant relationship, it’s crucial to understand the other person’s views on these issues and establish clear, mutual expectations.

However, advocating for these solutions should not be interpreted as an endorsement of misogyny, which is defined as hatred or mistrust of women. It is equally important to acknowledge that the antidote to misogyny is not misandry—the hatred or mistrust of men. Despite common misunderstandings about these terms, the reality is clear: women and men are inherently different and fulfill unique roles for important reasons. Acknowledging these differences shouldn’t be seen as a limitation but as an empowerment of each gender’s distinct qualities.

Embracing both masculinity and femininity is not only acceptable but necessary, as each represents crucial but different roles in society. Actual progress lies in recognizing and valuing these inherent qualities, not diminishing or favoring one gender over the other. We should focus on fostering a deeper understanding of what it means to be a man or a woman and accept that these differences are essential for societal health and balance. Ignoring these fundamental truths will only lead us toward the negative outcomes we currently fear. Our collective future, at least in part, depends on this understanding.

The Underlying Motive

Now, we have discussed where this is going (the effect), but I think it is also important to examine the true underlying cause or motive. Earlier, I mentioned that all of this seemed planned, and I asked who might gain from all of this. Many will not like the answer, but seminal texts like the ‘Communist Manifesto‘ and ‘Naked Communist‘ lay out a clear blueprint for this ideological infiltration. At the same time, the warnings from defectors like Yuri Bezmenov demonstrate just how methodically these plans have been executed—suggesting not only intent but considerable success. Feminists, and indeed all of us, should be critically aware of what side we are fighting for and, more importantly, who is orchestrating our actions.

While this might be hard to believe, and despite a simple search for “Marxism and Feminism” providing all anyone might need to confirm this, I feel compelled to say that this truth is no longer a secret. Take, for example, a study by Lin and Wang that expressly advocates for a deliberate and more decisive shift toward Marxist ideals, explicitly arguing that these principles are essential for true women’s liberation (Lin & Wang, 2023).

In many ways, this research demonstrates a broader agenda to reshape societal norms and economic systems, aligning with the rise of identity politics and the marginalization of economic critiques within feminism. Moreover, it serves as a stark example of how (and which) deep-rooted ideological shifts are fostering divisions and weakening traditional societal frameworks. I would argue that such deliberate transformations in ideological leanings are indeed contributing to the broader societal changes we are witnessing, from the destabilization of family units to the erosion of educational standards – the expected fallout.

The truth is that there is a strong alignment between Marxist principles and the various feminist movements. Oddly enough, these alignments go largely unnoticed by many women who simply want a better life. The scary part is that these connections are often seen as positives by the disillusioned. However, I would argue that the key is in the contrast.

Consider the information that I have already shared. These detriments (or goals) are already observable in our country, from the rise in crime rates, educational decline, and the erosion of traditional family values. Understand that these are the exact goals of the communist agenda against the West. I’m sure that most of us can agree that the collapse of our society is not in our best interests. With that in mind, consider the long-held association between Marxism and feminism and the recent overt calls to double down, as previously stated. And this might be hard for most, but ponder whether these truths make those in the feminist movement complicit in the dismantling of America or merely pawns.

My friends, it seems the wolf is already in the henhouse. Either way, we should be acutely aware that communism and Marxism historically result in even worse societal detriments, such as economic inefficiencies, widespread poverty, suppression of individual freedoms, political repression, and the emergence of new privileged classes—all of which can lead to and exacerbate the fragmentation and destabilization and collapse of societal structures. Indeed, it’s the Abilene Paradox because none of us want to go there, but nobody says anything because we are all now self-silenced. Regardless, the threat is real. Be careful what you ask for.

I will close with one final thought: it may seem obvious, but history repeatedly demonstrates that people will lose everything if they forget that the survival of a culture is rooted in its defense. While I agree that capitalism has its flaws and crony capitalism is absolutely terrible, if you care about this country at all, if you care about freedom and prosperity, if you care about our children, you must act accordingly and with urgency and purpose. As for this divide between men and women, perhaps we should all consider how empty our lives will be if we ignore our innate desire for meaningful companionship and reproduction. How happy when can we truly be if we harbor so much hatred and distrust for the ones we are supposed to turn to?